Pros And Cons Of Police Discretion

The textbook defines police discretion as the use of individual judgement, instead of formal rules, in decision making (Bohm & Haley, 2012). The use of discretion is important because patrol officers cannot be expected to make an arrest for every violation of the law they encounter. For example misdemeanor violations are generally handled differently than felony violations. Minor traffic violations may be handled differently based on the demeanor of the suspect. Patrol officers generally have the latitude to use discretion in a given situation (Bohm & Haley, 2012). Full enforcement is defined by the practice of police officers making an arrest for every violation they encounter. Selective enforcement relies on the judgment of the individual officer to determine which laws to enforce (Bohm & Haley, 2012). The writer has already stated that police officers cannot be expected to

The writer contends that community policing can bridge the gap in trust between the community and police departments. Community policing allows citizens to get to know their community police officers. The relationship can have a positive impact on reducing crime. The writer contends that police officers must be able to use good judgement when they encounter violations. Selective enforcement is a key element of having a successful community policing program. Selective enforcement also has its critics. Critics will point out the inconsistencies with regard to selective enforcement. Critics argue that enforcement can be based on race, culture, and social status. Recent studies paint a different picture. A federal study of police and public contracts revealed that police stops are fairly similar across racial lines. The study revealed that whites are stopped at a rate of 8.9%, blacks at 8.1%, and Hispanics at 8.9%. The study did reveal that blacks are more likely to be search and arrested if they are stopped (Bohn & Haley,